Selective Computed Tomography (CT) Imaging is Superior to Liberal CT Imaging in the Hemodynamically Normal Pediatric Blunt Trauma Patient.

BACKGROUND: The optimal imaging strategy in hemodynamically stable pediatric blunt trauma remains to be defined. The purpose of this study was to determine the differences between selective and liberal computed tomography (CT) strategy in a pediatric trauma population with respect to radiation exposure and outcomes. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of hemodynamically stable blunt pediatric trauma patients (≤16 y) who were admitted to a Level I trauma center between 2013-2016. Patients were stratified into selective and liberal imaging cohorts. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to compare outcomes between the groups. Outcomes included radiation dose, hospital and ICU length of stay, complications and mortality. RESULTS: Of the 485 patients included, 176 underwent liberal and 309 selective CT imaging. The liberal cohort were more likely to be severely injured (ISS>15: 34.1 versus 8.4%, P< 0.001). The odds of exposure to a radiation dose of >15 mSv were higher with liberal scanning in patients with both ISS > 15 (OR 2.78, 95% CI 1.76-5.19, P< 0.001) and ISS ≤ 15 (OR 3.41, 95% CI 2.19-8.44, P < 0.001). Adjusted outcomes regarding mortality, ICU length of stay, and complications were similar between the cohorts. CONCLUSION: Selective CT imaging in hemodynamically stable blunt pediatric trauma patients was associated with reduced radiation exposure and similar outcomes when compared to a liberal CT strategy.

Increased Incidence of COVID-19 Infections Amongst Interpersonal Violence Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether any specific acute care surgery patient populations are associated with a higher incidence of COVID-19 infection. BACKGROUND: Acute care providers may be exposed to an increased risk of contracting the COVID-19 infection since many patients present to the emergency department without complete screening measures. However, it is not known which patients present with the highest incidence. METHODS: All acute care surgery (ACS) patients who presented to our level I trauma center between March 19, 2020, and September 20, 2020 and were tested for COVID-19 were included in the study. The patients were divided into two cohorts: COVID positive (+) and COVID negative (-). Patient demographics, type of consultation (emergency general surgery consults [EGS], interpersonal violence trauma consults [IPV], and non-interpersonal violence trauma consults [NIPV]), clinical data and outcomes were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare differences between the groups. RESULTS: In total, 2177 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 116 were COVID+ (5.3%) and 2061 were COVID- (94.7%). COVID+ patients were more frequently Latinos (64.7% versus 61.7%, P = 0.043) and African Americans (18.1% versus 11.2%, P < 0.001) and less frequently Caucasian (6.0% versus 14.1%, P < 0.001). Asian/Filipino/Pacific Islander (7.8% versus 7.2%, P = 0.059) and Native American/Other/Unknown (3.4% versus 5.8%, P = 0.078) groups showed no statistical difference in COVID incidence. Mortality, hospital and ICU lengths of stay were similar between the groups and across patient populations stratified by the type of consultation. Logistic regression demonstrated higher odds of COVID+ infection amongst IPV patients (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.62-7.56, P < 0.001) compared to other ACS consultation types. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that victims of interpersonal violence were more likely positive for COVID-19, while in hospital outcomes were similar between COVID-19 positive and negative patients.

Utility of the Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis Score: Comorbid Conditions Do Matter.

Background: The Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis (LRINEC) has been proposed as a diagnostic tool for necrotizing soft tissue infection (NSTI). However, its utility remains underreported, particularly in patients with comorbid conditions. The purpose of this study was to identify the test characteristics of LRINEC for patients with various comorbid conditions. Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective study including patients with suspected NSTI. Our study patients were then relegated into the subgroups; intravenous drug use (IVDU), end-stage liver disease (ESLD), and diabetes mellitus (DM). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of a positive LRINEC score (≥ 6 or 8) were calculated in reference to intra-operative findings or results of the pathologic examination. Area under the curve (AUC) using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) plots were compared between each subgroup and the overall study population using DeLong test. Results: A total of 220 patients were included for the analysis. Overall, the sensitivity was 76%, specificity of 52%, PPV of 32%, and NPV of 88%. The subgroup analysis showed low PPVs in all subgroups. The DM and ESLD groups had a high NPV (90.5% and 88.0%, respectively), whereas NPV in the IVDU group was 70.6%. The AUC and DeLong test for the subgroups were 0.649 (p = 0.902) for ESLD, 0.699 (p = 0.683) for DM, and 0.565 (p = 0.034) for IVDU. Conclusions: The LRINEC can be a useful adjunct to rule out the diagnosis of NSTI with exception of IVDU. In contrast, further diagnostic workup might be still required in those patients with positive LRINEC.

Increased Use of Prehospital Tourniquet and Patient Survival: Los Angeles Countywide Study.

BACKGROUND: Recent trends in prehospital tourniquet use remain underreported. In addition, the impact of prehospital tourniquet use on patient survival has not been evaluated in a population-level study. We hypothesized that prehospital tourniquets were used more frequently in Los Angeles County and their use was associated with improved patient survival. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study using a database maintained by the Los Angeles County Emergency Medical Services Agency. We included patients who sustained extremity vascular injuries between October 2015 and July 2019. Patients were divided into the following study groups: prehospital tourniquet and no-tourniquet group. Our primary end point was in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes included 4- and 24-hour transfusion requirements and delayed amputation. RESULTS: A total of 944 patients met our inclusion criteria. Of those, 97 patients (10.3%) had prehospital tourniquets placed. The rate of tourniquet use increased linearly throughout our study period (goodness of fit, p = 0.014). In multivariable analysis, prehospital tourniquet use was significantly associated with improved mortality (adjusted odds ratio 0.32; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.85; p = 0.032). Similarly, transfusion requirements were significantly lower within 4 hours (regression coefficient -547.76; 95% CI, -762.73 to -283.49; p < 0.001) and 24 hours (regression coefficient -1,389.82; 95% CI, -1,824.88 to -920.97; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in delayed amputation rates (adjusted odds ratio 1.07; 95% CI, 0.21 to 10.88; p < 0.097). CONCLUSIONS: Prehospital tourniquet use has been on the rise in Los Angeles County. Our results suggest that the use of prehospital tourniquets for extremity vascular injuries is associated with improved patient survival and decreased blood transfusion requirements, without an increase in delayed amputations.

Validation of a Novel Clinical Criteria to Predict Candidacy for Aortic Occlusion: An Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery Study.

For trauma patients with noncompressible truncal hemorrhage (NCTH), aortic occlusion (AO) is attempted with either resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) or the resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA). However, it is often challenging to identify the group of patients who would benefit from AO procedures. We hypothesized that patients who met simple clinical criteria would have better outcomes following AO procedures. This is a retrospective cohort study using the Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery database (November 2013-August 2019) which included patients who arrived with signs of life and underwent AO procedures (RT or zone 1 REBOA). Outcomes were compared between patients who met the criteria (admission vital signs: Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) ≥9 and systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg) and those who did not. Subgroup analyses were then conducted on patients who had a REBOA placed and those who underwent RT. A total of 998 patients met our inclusion criteria. Of those, a REBOA was placed in 364 patients (37%), while 634 (64%) underwent RT. The overall mortality rate in the criteria (+) group was significantly lower than that in the criteria (-) group (62 vs. 79%, P < .001). In patients who survived beyond the emergency department following AO procedures, those who met the criteria underwent hemorrhage control procedures more frequently (83% vs. 57%, P < .001). Our data suggest that simple clinical criteria could guide the provider for proceeding with AO in patients with suspected NCTH.

Who Would Have Benefited from the Prehospital Use of Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA)? An Autopsy Study.

BACKGROUND: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) has been increasingly used as part of damage control resuscitation for patients with non-compressible truncal hemorrhage. We hypothesized that there might be a select group of patients that could have benefited from prehospital placement of the REBOA. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study including patients who presented to a Level I trauma center with cardiac arrest between January 2014 and March 2018. The findings of a full autopsy were reviewed for the details of internal injuries. A patient was determined to be a REBOA candidate if the patient sustained abdominal organ injuries or pelvic fractures and no associated severe head injuries. The candidate group was compared with the non-candidate group based on prehospital vital signs and other patient characteristics. A multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify certain prehospital factors associated with candidacy for prehospital REBOA. RESULTS: A total of 198 patients met our inclusion criteria. Of those, 27 (13.6%) patients were deemed REBOA candidates. Median Injury Severity Score was 22 (interquartile range 17 to 29). Patients in the candidate group were more likely to have a Glasgow Coma Scale score ≥9 (48% vs 15%; p = 0.012), oxygen saturation >90% (56% vs 35%; p = 0.03), and systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg (48% vs 26%; p = 0.04) in the field. Logistic regression showed that these 3 clinical parameters of prehospital vital signs were significantly associated with REBOA candidacy. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that >10% of trauma patients who presented with cardiac arrest could have benefited from prehospital REBOA. Additional prospective studies are warranted to validate the use of field vital signs in selecting candidates.